New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a nation's war and defense efforts. Since the last attempts at a "Star Wars" defense system, has technology changed considerably enough to make the latest Missile Defense initiatives more successful? Can such an application of science be successful? Is a militarized space inevitable, necessary or impossible?

Read Debates, a new Web-only feature culled from Readers' Opinions, published every Thursday.

kalter.rauch - 07:22am Jan 26, 2003 EST (# 8079 of 8085)
Earth vs <^> <^> <^>

Rshow......

Don't imagine for AN INSTANT that our compassion for your mental state is letting you off the hook vis your support for torture...not to mention your OTHER "thought crimes".

You're a conniving and clever sophist and rhetorician, but that doesn't cover the outrageous affronts to human dignity evinced by your equivocations.

Like I said to lchick......I'm catching up on my reading!!!

almarst2002 - 07:26am Jan 26, 2003 EST (# 8080 of 8085)

The United States is condoning the torture and illegal interrogation of prisoners held in the wake of September 11, in defiance of international law and its own constitution, according to lawyers, former US intelligence officers and human rights groups. - http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,882002,00.html

rshow55 - 07:38am Jan 26, 2003 EST (# 8081 of 8085)
Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES. Click "rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for on this thread.

I posted this MD7999 - and it is worth stating again.

Lunarchick and I have worked hard to focus some patterns, and believe we've worked out some. Here are two at the level needed to think about exception handling . The golden rule (a principle of symettry) helps sort out a lot of things, I believe. The notion of disciplined beauty (harmony) helps sort out a lot of things, I believe.

(search "golden rule" or see http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md01000s/DetailNGR.htm )

(search "disciplined beauty" or see http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7b085/157 - - also set out in 5438-40 of this thread.

Some other general principles (checking codes) also help. These principles can often be thought of as clarifications of what people or things naturally do - what "the logic of the situation" naturally produces or favors.

We are in a muddle here in large part because people are not discussing some of the most crucial problems - one among them being that the notions of "honor" in the Islamic world and in the West are significantly different in some ways that need to be discussed.

The UN security counsel, under Germany's leadership, might be a near-ideal place for these discussion within the next few weeks.

Can Iraq, or any other Islamic nation, do exactly what the Bush administration hopes - in exactly the way that is being asked? Are we asking them to do things that go against some of their most basic religious committments? If we are - all concerned had better understand the problems more than they have so far. Saddam may have made promises he intended to keep - and found he couldn't. We may be asking for things that we shouldn't ask for without a lot more understanding than we've had.

There are some very basic barriers to checking in Islamic cultures that haven't been clearly enough discussed -and they are linked to Islamic religious-sexual committments that are very different from ours. These get in the way of arms inspections - and almost everything involved in the accomodation of modernity.

- - -

We are in a serious situation here - and no one has a right to unconditional trust. Gisterme surely does not - and looking at his posts (more than 1000 of them) ought to make that clear. Many posts by Ann Coulter (search Coulter) are of interest, too. The UN is being asked to make an exception to its most basic principle - prohibition of territorial invasion - and I believe that exception handling is sometimes necessary. But only when there are reasons good enough to make the exception. - when there is overwhelming evidence. As it stands now, the only "evidence" that the UN has to look at that supports invasion is assurances from the US - that asks the world to trust and respect "connecting of the dots" by an administration that won't show its evidence - and that supports the kind of "connecting of the dots" one sees in the writings of Ann Coulter.

I don't think I'm being "let off the hook" for anything. Click "rshow55" for some background. If you want more details, go to the Guardian Talk links - and search "George Johnson" - there are some interesting links to this thread.

If leaders of nation states wanted things checked - this thread would be a fine place to start - and many, many lives (tens of thousands - and quite possibly many millions) could be saved.

(4 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense